Evidence record 12747 · automatically gathered

Registers and quotas: strengthening conscientious objection policy in healthcare

Introduction The permissibility of conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare presents a complex balance of benefits and harms, and philosophers disagree on whether it should be permitted at all. For example, consequentialists such as Udo Schuklenk argue that healthcare professionals should never be allowed to object, a position known as the ‘incompatibility thesis’. 1 Steve Clarke, however, believes that there is a positive consequentialist case for permitting CO in healthcare. 2 Th

Record details

Published: 22 July 2026
Source: Journal of Medical Ethics (BMJ)
Category: Research
Topics: Regulation · Healthcare
Retrieved: 23 July 2026

source-onlyevidence status

These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.

How to cite this record

ethics.ai (22 July 2026), “Registers and quotas: strengthening conscientious objection policy in healthcare,” evidence record 12747, https://ethics.ai/record/12747 (originally published by Journal of Medical Ethics (BMJ)).

JSON

Use and limitations

This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.